Katamari Creator Critical of Revolution 397
Gamasutra has an article on Keita Takahashi's reaction to the Revolution controller. From the article: "Takahashi commented of the Revolution, which has drawn widespread praise for its underlying concepts from other Eastern and Western designers: 'I'm not really interested in it. I don't think a controller should have that much influence on the enjoyment of games.' He continued: 'I see what [Nintendo is] trying to do, but they're putting such emphasis on the controller; 'Woah, this controller lets you do this!' and I'm thinking - are you messing with us?'"
What Evokes These Comments? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's new. It obviously has new capabilities. How about you use your imagination instead of your tongue?
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:4, Insightful)
Heaven FORBID that they need to go back to the drawing board on HCI (Human Computer Interaction) because there is now a lot more capability that was just added to the HCI interface. This completely causes you to re-design full gameplay and get new test studies on how to do things. It makes the companies work again for the titles instead of chop/paste from the past. WOW! They need to take some time again to develop games... what a concept. The sky is falling because of this.
Impact of controllers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I doubt it will ever materialize anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is that the Revolution controller does more than a normal controller, not less.
There already is one. It's called the Gamecube controller, and you'll be able to use it with the Revolution.
paradoxical comment (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:4, Insightful)
Try this, replace the word "controller" with the words "flashy graphics" in his quotes and I think you'll start getting a better sense of where he's coming from. I don't think his point is that he is not willing to adapt to a new controller, instead, he's saying that Nintendo seems to be emphasizing the controller itself instead of the things that Nintendo has been traditionally strong in, such as good gameplay and design. In a way he does have a point, cool controller does not a good game make. Just like having the most powerful graphics engine in the universe won't automatically make a crap game great. That's not to say that cool new innovative games that take advantage of the controller won't appear, I'm sure they will, but there's gotta be more than that in the long run to have a healthy platform.
Criticism Warranted (Score:2, Insightful)
But, speaking as an overworked graduate student in CS who once floated through K-12, I can say I don't have time for these "revolutions" in the game industry. Katamari Damacy is the only console game I've played in a long while that I actually loved, and part of that was because I could play for 20 minutes (make the moon!) and get a healthy dose of fun and entertainment (ah, the screams of people trapped in their office buildings...) and then put the game down and get back to work.
That doesn't have any direct bearing on the controller, but the controller is representative of this push into new audiences, and I think a symptom of that is companies like Nintendo are starting to ignore old audiences. I'm not interested in using my controller as a light gun (complete with me having to stand and spin around to turn), or as a sword and shield for Zelda, or whatever other recent rumor/fanboy postulating has come up with. I want to sit down for take a break for twenty minutes.
Granted that Takahashi's track record is pretty short, and not growing at any fast rate, but when reading his interviews (and playing his games) he's always felt like, to me, someone that got it -- I want my games to be fun, lazy, and distractions, not things I need to devote my life and body to (okay, I'm out of shape, sue me).
My casual gamer friends may find using the controller as a wand to be interesting, and Nintendo may think that it's pure gold (and the majority of the industry press may agree), but I just want a simple game I know how to play and can do so without large effort.
For me, Takahashi is right. And it makes me wonder if Nintendo is marginalizing one audience in favor of another.
Re:I doubt it will ever materialize anyway (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you really Nintendo would not bother to beta test their flagship product?
I'd think if they were going to ship a product that was horribly flawed they would notice it before they spent millions of dollars to bring it to market.
One Man's Opinion (Score:5, Insightful)
Keita can go and make Katamari Damacy for the original PS1 then. Oh, what's that? Can't handle the huge number of polygons in the game? Lack of dual-analog CONTROLLER makes it not nearly as fun? Yeah, that's what I thought
The Revolution's controller, at the very least, will allow for new gameplay elements. Whether or not this will lead to new and exciting game design is up for speculation, but it won't hurt and it's certainly not some kind of smoke screen.
Not deep enough? (Score:5, Insightful)
The controller has everything to do with the enjoyment of games, because that's how you interact with them. If this statement was really true, we'd all be using controllers like the Colecocision [videogamecritic.net] and other such monstrocities from the early 1980s. Look, it has nine buttons AND A KNOB! What more could you possibly ask for? And it's a sturdy, small design, so it can easily be stored.
Can you make enjoyable games with the current controllers? Hell yeah. But the Revolution contoller is about immersion as much as it is about enjoyment. Instead of sending an instruction to your character to swing the sword (passive second person) you actually move your arm to swing the sword (active first person), which will make people much more interested if they actually play the game instead of watch it.
Let's say you like playing sports. Which would you rather do? Be the coach who sits in the box and tells the batter when to swing, or be the batter and decide when you want to swing?
Games will be made on the PS3, 360, and Revolution that are enjoyable. But games will only be made for the Revolution that are immersable, which just compounds the enjoyment.
I think everybody's missing the point (Score:3, Insightful)
I tend to agree. (Score:4, Insightful)
I personally cant stand the existing controllers covered in buttons and poorly designed games where developers felt the need to use every single button on them. So, I'm not saying Nintendo shouldn't use this thing as the centerpiece for the Revolution. Games like Guitar Hero have shown that Nintendo doesn't really corner the market on unique controllers. So I don't think it's going to quite spur the sort of innovation some people are expecting. The innovations that come will be due to compelling game design, not because some unusual controller has inspired it.
Remember who's speaking (Score:4, Insightful)
Keita Takahashi, as a game designer, is not slave to the limitations of the hardware. He is master of the limitations of the hardware. Takahashi is one of those rare people who knows how to play limitations like a harp.
I would imagine this is why he is apparently not all that interested in seeing those limitations removed.
He is, of course, a bit of an aberration. Pretty much all other game designers are working at a quite different level. Among this group of developers ("everybody else"), there are quite a lot of people who are excited by the possibilities the Revolution controller offers nad feel it will allow them to express ideas that otherwise would be impossible to manifest in game form, and a lot of other people who aren't expressing interest in the Revolution but in the whole don't seem to think a whole lot about play control (and so keep churning out games which never quite feel natural or correct when thoughtlessly shoehorned underneath the modern standard maze-of-joysticks-and-buttons game controller). With both of these groups, and I think that's a significant portion of all game developers, both the developers and the resulting games would benefit from the Revolution control idiom if it became standard.
But if anyone has the right to say the revolution controller isn't necessary, it's the guy who, with Katamari Damacy, managed to make a totally revolutionary and unique control scheme out of the Dual Shock 2.
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:2, Insightful)
If you put your self in a bubble where the entire room is the screen and give your self a new controller (maybe the movement of your body? and a gun for shooting things?) and you've got your self a completely new gaming environment. How is the controller not a huge piece of this?
In gaming you have the hardware, the screen, the controller and the game its self. If they were all equal the controller would make up 25% of that. Thats huge.
If we always used the same flat screen and same basic controller how would we ever go anywhere with games? There would be very little freedom of what we could do.
The problem people seem to be having is that they aren't using their imginations. They are trying to fit our standard type of games we play today into Nintendos new concept and they just don't see how they can play all their favorite games. They refuse to think about NEW games and NEW ways of playing games.
When people think about sword fighting games, golf or baseball games for the Revolution they think of you swinging the controller around wildly or acting like a real base ball player and to me this just seems kind of stupid. I mean it could be fun but it doesn't have to be that crazy.
Think about a baseball game. you could use the joystick part of the controller to move your guy around by the plate and hold the remote in your hand. slight wrist movements would move the bat around. You could swing your wrist foward to swing the bat with out even having to move your entire arm. It would give you full control of how your guy holds the bat and how he swings it. It would add completely new level of skill and fun to the way the game is played.
There are tons of possibilities for a controller like the one for the Revolution but you're going to have to open your mind first.
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you require neither flashier graphics, superior processing power, nor a new look at game input, then you really don't need a new console at all. Which you could argue you don't, if in fact you are one of those who has mastered good gameplay and design. But if you want to create actual change in gaming from the standpoint of hardware, then a game controller is a good way to do it.
Case in point: Would you say that Nintendo abandoned good gameplay and design when they developed the N64 controller? Is a D-Pad all a good game designer ever needs? Or did the addition of the analog stick open up possibilities for good designers that didn't really exist before? From Mario 64 to Super Monkey Ball to Katamari Damacy itself, there are slews of games which were able to do more with an analog stick than they would with a digital one, and have much better gameplay as a result.
I highly doubt Nintendo has de-emphasized gameplay and design. I strongly suspect that Nintendo's game designers want the new controller as much as anyone as a way to realize better gameplay. If Nintendo is mostly talking about the controller, it's because 1) it's the major change the console brings to the table and 2) they probably don't feel they really need to say that they'll put effort into making games that are well designed irrespective of the controller.
Re:Remember who's speaking (Score:2, Insightful)
Have you ever played Katamari Damacy? Katamari is a slave to that controller. You could not play that game without two identical joysticks. MAYBE you could play it on a GameCube controller.
Re:Remember who's speaking (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:2, Insightful)
Nintendo's got it backwards (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow a sony dev has no interest in Nintendo? SHOCK (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the controller, I believe Nintendo's goal isnt to focus on the controller but to make the controller something you dont have to think about. I really think they have the right idea and if its done well, it will revolutionize the game industry. Imagine an interface that has virtually no learning curve. People that have never gamed before will be attracted to it after learning its as easy as using a remote control. As a bonus, educators and parents groups will praise it because it not only encourages but requires physical activity. I really think the hardcore gaming community is really underestimating what Nintendo is bringing to the table.
Re:Remember who's speaking (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not deep enough? (Score:2, Insightful)
How often have you seen someone move their controller wildly as they try to make Master Chief dodge enemy fire or have Mario perform a difficult jump? Or how about moving their controller along with the aircraft on the screen? These people, who are more often than not, casual gamers, are so immersed already that they think moving the controller will help, even though it doesn't. Given that, I think the Revolution has a pretty darn good chance to be more immersive than any controller we've seen so far.
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you consider Super Mario 1, 2, 3, World, 64 the same game or just a bland revamp? Do you think Mario Tennis, Mario Soccer, Mario Party....is a revamp of the Mario series?
Try the games before you start spouting nonsense. These games are highly acclaimed because they are great games. Heck, it could be named Super Mario Part 23858934, if it's a good game, it will stand on its on merits.
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:2, Insightful)
Heck, people were saying the analog controller for the N64 was gimmicky, but once it was shown how it could be used and became a primary source, then it became an essential part of ALL video game controllers.
The rumble pack, I considered a gimmick, however it caught on real fast and now it's part of ALL controllers.
Even the touch screen stylus for the DS was at first considered to be a gimmick, and we know how successful the DS has been.
As long as something this new and different is not an add-on / after thought, and is standard as part of a new system, developers will develop for it and we won't have to worry about the lack of games supporting this controller.
Of course, this will only be true if the controller works properly, and so far, the reviews from people who have had HANDS-ON experience, is raving about this new step.
Yes. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:2, Insightful)
So again, recycled concepts.
And if I told you that I'm playing that one side-scrolling Mario game with the mushrooms and goombas, would you have any idea even which system I was talking about? Yes, each game has some differences but at the core Mario 1, 2, 3, World, 64, plus Mario Land, Wario etc are all the same game.
As to the article - I hope this does not hurt Slashdotters opinions of Takahashi's. People should remember that this is a video game designer that doesn't play video games. What would he know?
If DualShock wasn't implemented in PS2 would Katamari be any good? That is a game that relies on a certain controller to work - it could possibly be ported to XBox but not as easily to GameCube. Look at games like DDR, Guitar Hero, and Donkey Konga. People like (for the most part) new, different controllers. I agree with Takahashi that Nintendo is putting all of it's emphasis on the controller - that's why the Revolution was created in the first place. The hardware drives the controller, and that is it's primary purpose.
In the end - no one cares what you think, Takahashi. Your first, one, and only game (while awesome) only came out on PS2 anyway. The sequel was a rushed rehash (still, even more awesome) - again on PS2 exclusive. Why would we believe you would develop for the Revolution?
I fully expect to see him eating his words someday...
Takahashi needs to learn from the DS (Score:2, Insightful)
The same thing happened to the DS- developers assumed that because there were 2 screens and a touch screen and a microphone, you had to use all of that in your game. A few developers pre-emptively knocked the DS for this very reason. But look at the best DS games, like Castlevania, Mario Kart, or Nintendogs: they're all more or less the same kind of games we're used to but they use the features the DS offers in exciting ways to enrich the gameplay and immerse us in it. The Revolution operates on the same principle- don't build your game AROUND the features but rather use the features to enhance an already-good game design.
So in that sense I agree with Takahashi, that the quality of a game design is not inherently linked to a controller. However, I think the best game designs are the ones that use the unique tools available to them. Dawn of Sorrow would've been just like the trifecta of Castlevanias on the GBA had it not included the new spell system you drew onto the touch screen yourself. In this way, a good game design was enhanced with the DS's tools to make it unique, which I think very much helped Dawn of Sorrow become the best game in the series, save Symphony of the Night only.
The Revolution is all about ENHANCING gameplay, not CREATING gameplay.
-Moses
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:5, Insightful)
Nintendo's also known for innovation in its hardware. With the Game & Watch Nintendo invented the D-pad, and introduced it to the home console with the NES/Famicom. Then they introduced the analog stick with the N64 (albeit in a bizarrey shaped controller). With the Gamecube they created the "digital click" which, though largely unused, was a very nice compromise between digital and analog shoulder buttons (for a good use of this feature see Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes). And now, with the DS, they've introduced all kinds of interesting possibilitied with the touchscreen (not their invention, but it's a first in consoles). There are games for the DS that simply CAN NOT be reroduced with a standard controller, such as Yoshi Touch & Go and Kirby's Canvas Curse. Then there are interesting side-notes, like the gyroscopic controls in Kirby Tilt & Tumble.
Furthermore, you complain all you want about Nintendo's stable of franchises, but they do innovate a lot within the confines of said IP. For a classic example, look at Mario 64- it's basically the template from which all other 3D platformers are drawn. Also take a look at Super Smash Bros.- character-wise it's the epitome of Nintendo's franchise-itis: it's nothing but old Nintendo franchises stuffed into a fighting game. Pokemon, But, when you look beyond that, you'll find a fighting game that's hugely different from just about any other on the market. Pokemon, hated as it is by insecure teens, is another great example of innovation. It's a variation on the standard RPG formula, but it veers sharply from mand of the standards/cliches of the genre with wildly entertaining results. Finally, the Kirby titles in the previous paragraph also serve as a good example- the little puffball's had at least 4 different control schemes.
I wouldn't say that Nintendo's reliance on fanchises is a case of laziness. It demonstrates an understanding of the power and recognizability that such old standards can have. Hell, I'd go so far as to say that it's a testament to the power of Nintendo's innovation. You don't create such strong brands by simply doing the same thing over. You do it by making something new and different that sticks with people.
Re:What Evokes These Comments? (Score:3, Insightful)
Never forget that was invented by Nintendo as well. Before the D-Pad, people used joysticks, and had no idea how much they hated them until the D-Pad.
In fact, being as how Nintendo was right about the D-Pad, right about the modern ``analog'' stick, right about the touching, why does it seem so difficult for people to believe that they might also be right about the freestyle wand?
Nintendo has demonstrated again and again that they invent excellent general purpose input devices, and again and again that new and exciting games take advantage of them.
Of course, then there's the Virtual Boy.
You're proving yourself wrong (Score:3, Insightful)
So what you're saying is that Katamari Damacy would not have been possible with a controller without two analog sticks? That's, like, every console generation before the current one.
Not to mention that it was Nintendo who introduced the analog stick. But that shouldn't have that much influence on the enjoyment of games, right?